snafu

I don’t think the Doors are the most overrated rock band ever, but I think their music should be retired from radio. It sounds very dated at this point. My unpopular opinion is that all bags on an airplane flight must be checked so that boarding and leaving the plane isn’t such a s**tshow. One purse or backpack okay.

Palat is an UFA after this season and Tampa has cap trouble and Buffalo has a lot of money to throw at him. He’d be a good guy to go after for sure.

I think you meant to say weevils.

I’m just hoping they look like this

Before I realized his status (injured/retired) I honestly thought they were bringing him in to compete for a job. What’s sad is that the idea doesn’t seem too far fetched considering the team’s recent attempts to fix the goaltending. This particular team could really use a high quality goalie, and I wouldn’t care if they grossly overpaid for him. It would make all the young talent’s lives on the ice much easier.

Trespassing laws don't have "carry more weight" clauses. The extra weight is seen in enforcement -- the fact that people WERE tracked down and charged from all over the country if they committed a crime. The extra weight is seen in comparison to those who've recently rioted in other places, yet were unlikely to have been charged with the same trespassing crime. Note Seattle's CHOP arrests and releases. https://komonews.com/news/operation-crime-justice/seattle-polices-chop-sweep-brought-arrests-but-quick-release-from-jail-as-well . A police Station was commandeered for days and there was violence, assaults on Police, and death. This isn't meant to be whatboutery. This is an example of where "carry more weight" is enforced for the same basic offenses. If people were disrupting or disturbing a public meeting, then I'm sure there are laws on the books to charge people. If people assaulted someone, there's a good chance they'd be charged for assault. Same goes for destroying property, or assaulting a police officer, or sedition. I'm not making any equivalencies, and I'm not defending anyone's illegal actions. I just see that too many people want to throw every single participant into the same basket of sedition. Fortunately, the law doesn't work that way. Here is a decent summary of those charged from the events that day, and for what. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-capitol-riot-arrests-latest/

Most people who participated in 1/6 were trespassers. Many became rioters. The rioters were "influenced by people from outside the area”. I learned that phrase during the riots of 2020 that occurred all over the country. The same thing could be said for most any civil unrest. Ticket the trespassers. Charge and prosecute the rioters like any other rioters we’ve recently seen. Charge and prosecute the outside influencers. What’s difficult about this?

It's kind of funny that you would say this. The Carter Page FISA warrants were shown to be bogus, complete with false statements by a DOJ Attorney -- and in large part based upon the bogus Steele Dossier. Before that, everyone who defended the warrants said things just like what you said, above. Now, I'm not saying that DR's Ghost provided any citations, but it is certainly curious that this Misfud character has never really been vetted as a Russian anything. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/us/politics/joseph-mifsud-mueller.html And go to the source...Misfud denies all of it in his own words. https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2017/11/01/news/russiagate_mystery_professor_joseph_mifsud_speaks_out_dirt_on_hillary_clinton_nonsense_-179948962/ I agree that Durham had to overcome one simple statement by Sussman that he went to Baker "on his own". Durham didn't disprove that statement. Case closed. However, there were apparently communications that Durham tried to get admitted on the eve of the trial and those were considered privileged. I think he may have been hamstrung late in the game. Seems like Durham should have made sure he'd be able to present all the evidence he wanted, when he wanted it. In any event, Sussman was acquitted, that's true.

Edmonton would be rolling to a cup if they had a decent goaltender. The Rangers are in the upper limits of where I hoped the Sabres would be in two years, but Levi went back to school.

I’m fairly certain there are representatives of both parties who are obstacles to reform. Politicizing this issue is disingenuous. People need to stop making it out to be that there are no gun owners who want and like their guns and are registered Democrat or Independent — and no gun owners who are completely apolitical. If there was real political will from both parties, gun reform wouldn’t be an issue today. Talking about mental illness isn’t a deflection, either. Neither is it a deflection to talk about social media and it’s effects on young minds. Why wouldn’t people seek multiple ways to deal with this problem. Is it only a deflection when “GOP electeds” talk about these issues?

I understand how oppo research normally works. The Clinton campaign and the DNC appear to have taken their oppo research too far. Yes, it is important for people to report suspicions to authorities — not make things up and report stories and fictions. Not to use investigative agencies as pawns for political gain. I only read the headlines of the Sussman trial yesterday, though it looks like Clinton was in the loop with her campaign, according to her campaign manager’s testimony. I’m actually surprised by that. And Clinton didn’t lose because of Comey. Clinton lost because she was an unlikeable abysmal failure as a candidate. As for Trump’s obstruction of justice — that came after he was elected. None of it has anything to do with Russian interference. The question is how can Trump obstruct something that isn’t there to find. Again, I’m not saying that the Trump campaign were pure. I’m saying that you’re qualifying one campaign as somehow less scummy than the other — and somehow it is proper to investigate one campaign and not the other. All I heard for five years was “smoke/fire” with regard to Trump’s campaign. This thread is about Sussman and the DNC. Smoke/fire. Nice convo ChiGoose. 🍺🍺.

I said foreign actors and our government. I never said that Steele was working for his government. Did Mueller ever say that any Russian in contact with the Trump campaign was working for the Russian Government? Maybe, I don't remember. In any event, Steele (foreign actor) knew exactly where he got his bogus info -- Danchenko (RUSSIAN foreign actor who's next up for trial in October). Steele and his Fusion GPS friends -- working for the Clinton campaign -- took his bogus info and peddled it at the same time to the FBI, the DOJ (though the Ohrs) and the press. The game was to start enough of a whisper campaign so that it blossomed into investigations and reporting on investigations. Well done, overall. Our government ran with all of these "Good Samaritan leads" well beyond the time when the information was known by our government to be bogus. Look up the Carter Page portion of 2016. I never said that the UK made any effort to influence the election. I did say that there's a strong appearance that our own government had a hand in the election. Probably unwittingly at the start, but there were leaks from the FBI to the press, as documented by Horowitz' investigation. At the beginning of your post, you said the Trump Campaign did bad, possibly criminal, things. But Trump may not have. You won't say the same thing for the Clinton Campaign.

The FAA keeps delaying approval for SpaceX launches in Texas. 4 delays in a row now since the beginning of the year. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-faa-extends-environmental-review-spacex-program-texas-2022-04-29/

To the first bolded part -- aside from the fact that Mueller's job was to investigate and report (not charge) do you think Trump did anything wrong in 2016? Do you think the House should have impeached Trump for his alleged misdeeds in the 2016 campaign? To the second bolded part -- the dossier was handed to the the press and the FBI simultaneously in order to create a feedback loop of reporting and investigation. It was the main predicate for the Carter Page FISA warrants. It was bullshyt, but it was useful bullshyt --used to maintain an investigation into Trump that revealed nothing of substance. It is the same pattern as the Sussman case. To the third bolded point, I think Sussman has a plausible defense. Whether he really was acting as a concerned citizen is plausible. The prosecution doesn't seem able to directly connect Sussman to a plan to bring the Alfa Bank information to the FBI -- though it smells real bad like that was the plan. So what you have with the 2016 campaigns (both of them) are allegations and nothing "provable". You might say that the Trump campaign allegedly worked with foreign actors to influence the 2016 campaign. A better case might be made that the Clinton campaign allegedly worked with foreign actors and our own Government to influence the 2016 campaign. Which is worse?

Trump was impeached and tried by the Senate twice. But neither impeachment had anything to do with Russian collusion or with obstruction of the investigation into Russian collusion. You speculate that Mueller figured he couldn't indict a sitting President. Mueller did document a lot of acts of Trump associates. Maybe the evidence didn't lead Mueller to conclude that he uncovered anything more than questionable acts. And to top it off, Congress figured they couldn't impeach him for these things. Are you saying that Congress was willing to let bygones be bygones yet impeached him twice on unrelated matters after the Mueller report came out?

It happens with every thread. Hell, most threads are simply started just for one "side" to try to ***** on the other "side". As for the Sussman case, the bigger picture, to many people, is that it looks like there was a pattern during the 2016 campaign when it came to Trump and Russia. If there wasn't anything true or meaty to throw at Trump, they went to the press with B.S., and also went to the FBI with the same B.S. so that the press could report that the B.S. allegations were being investigated. Same thing happened with Carter Page (resulting in four bogus FISA warrants), and maybe with Papadopolous (set up by Misfud with false information, perhaps). Manafort was busted for things that weren't actually related to the Trump campaign even though it was known that he shared polling info, and his own business partner rolled over on him. It looks a lot like people were investigating Trump and whoever was involved with Trump to try to find dirt. They weren't trying to investigate something that occurred -- they were trying to find something that occurred. It is an important distinction. To date, nobody actually knows whether the Russians hacked and stole any information. The cases against the Russian trolls which came out of Mueller's investigation went nowhere. No institution--but only a private company ever investigated the Dem Party servers to see whether they were hacked or not. Maybe there was a Russian hack, but wouldn't people who allege that a hack occurred want to come out with the proof of it? I mean, there was a lot of time, sweat and allegations spread over more than 4 years for that to be ignored. I think Sussman will probably get acquitted. There's enough doubt the defense can come up with to present to the jury, and from reports, it looks like the prosecution witnesses are acting sort of squirrely. That being said, I don't think Durham is done, and I think there's another trial coming up against the guy who fed false info to Steele for his infamous dossier.

The 19 year old didn’t know to put his feet on the clutch and brake when starting the car? Anyhow, the article is clickbait. The dealership has been ordered to indemnify the vehicle owner if the owner is found liable. This is the last paragraph from the article: “But, Femminineo said, the Rochester Hills Chrysler Jeep Dodge dealership where the incident occurred has been ordered by the court to indemnify Jeep owner Diaz-Navarro if he is found liable of negligence. This is confirmed in a summary filed in court on March 1.”

Thoughts? How about the headline stops at “Karine Jean-Pierre to become White House Press Secretary”. Isn't it time for people to get past “the first” anything? If this person does her job well, isn’t that enough?

And his leg wouldn’t have been there if the D-man didn’t hit him from behind.

He was cutting to the top of the crease and the defenseman slammed into his back. He never took a straight line to the goalie. Then his play while falling to the ice was a great effort.

Rangers just had what I think was a good likely game winner called off. The call was goalie interference on a great play by Kakko.

I heard the statue took one look at Baker and demanded a trade.

Yes. It is all laid out in the Mueller report. Now here's the part that you don't care about -- but you should because it is important and gives the "so what" to your question. Mueller had 140+ chances to find 2016 election meddling by the Trump campaign, and said there's no evidence of it. It was his sole and specific job to look for it. He reported that he found nothing. On top of that, Pelosi had the ability to impeach Trump -- and she did so twice. Neither impeachment had to do with collusion or 2016 election interference.

Their window is almost closed. And it isn’t like they’ve made friends the world over. I’m sure there’s no influx of child-rearing immigrants flooding their shores. Oh well.

I’ve never been on the Masters.com website. I’ll check it out. As for the elevation and layout, I have to disagree.